daedaluscan wrote:He took a lot of time to shorten it at the quadrant end and make it look original. A nice job complete with distressed paint. Not sure that there was any basis for approval:) Someone would have to be extremely observant to see it.

EZFlap wrote:.... I got to hear several hilarious stories about how others solved this problem in the past. One guy had a section of a dog's leash he tied to the flap handle and the loop end was velcro'ed to the panel. Another guy took great pleasure in showing me how he figured out that he could use his right foot to hook under the thumb button, depress the button, and raise the handle. ....Then there was the guy who said he carried a length of half inch dowel rod and a little nylon pocket taped to the end.....

hotrod180 wrote:While I don't see the need for an EZ Flap, I can understand why others might like them.
But I find it hard to believe that anyone would do the dog leash/right foot/dowel things as described.
An EZ Flap is sure better than any of those.

EZFlap wrote:...Another important point is that a lot of pilots have the seat way too far forward in their 180's, most of which is because they want to be able to get to the flap control. I've seen people run the seat so far forward they can't get full control movement on the yoke. .... The other reason pilots go forward too far in a 180 is to try and see better over the nose aftr installing big tires.....

blackrock wrote:I'll report back after a few weeks of trying it out.

EZFlap wrote:The one in the photo (Bearhawk) is a completely different shaped unit, and different control/seat geometry, than your 180. Totally different. You can see the Cessna unit in use easily in the little video on the product website.

On the Bearhawk/Stinson/Maule/Piper, you almost never have to use the original flap handle (although it is still 100% functional). On the Cessna installation you will be using both the EZ Flap and the OEM Cessna handle equally. This is because Cessna uses a much longer tube and a 2 to 1 movement ratio (to get enough leverage to pull big flaps against big air loads).

Yes the EZFlap is not convenient to reach at full flap in a 180. It's not supposed to be. When installed correctly on a Cessna, at 30 and 40 degree flap deployment the EZ Flap unit is between your elbow and your rib cage, and you are holding the OEM Cessna handle in your hand. You won't "bump into it" but you will move your hand past it closely. This only takes a few cycles to get used to. At 0, 10, and 20 degrees you are holding the EZ Flap handle and un-lock trigger... and the OEM Cessna handle is out of your safe reach

Another important point is that a lot of pilots have the seat way too far forward in their 180's, most of which is because they want to be able to get to the flap control. I've seen people run the seat so far forward they can't get full control movement on the yoke. This is really unsafe, regardless of everything else. In most cases, these pilots can move the seat rearward (allowing more comfort and full safe control), because the EZ Flap brings the flap control within reach of the pilot. The other reason pilots go forward too far in a 180 is to try and see better over the nose aftr installing big tires. Moving the pilot upward (seat cushions, articulated seat) gives them back more of the lost visibility than moving forward. But upwards also means that the original flap handle is further away. So they choose the wrong, less safe solution. All that gets solved the safe way with the extension installed.

EZFlap wrote:Another important point is that a lot of pilots have the seat way too far forward in their 180's, most of which is because they want to be able to get to the flap control. I've seen people run the seat so far forward they can't get full control movement on the yoke. This is really unsafe, regardless of everything else.

Oregon180 wrote:

EZFlap wrote:Another important point is that a lot of pilots have the seat way too far forward in their 180's, most of which is because they want to be able to get to the flap control. I've seen people run the seat so far forward they can't get full control movement on the yoke. This is really unsafe, regardless of everything else.

I'm sorry, EZFlap, but this argument doesn't hold water. There are other reasons to choose your product, but sitting full forward in a 180 is not unsafe. The main argument I can see for the EZFlap in a 180 is to be able to go from zero flaps on takeoff without having to bend forward. This has very little to do with seat position.

Personally, I start my takeoff roll with 20 degrees and can easily "pop" them for short take offs without reducing safety. The small aerodynamic advantage I would gain by starting my takeoff roll at zero flaps isn't a priority for me, but I'm just a weekend warrior, not a STOL champion.

bigrenna wrote:I think you'd better quit while your ahead bro... The BS is starting to get pretty deep....

Nothing has been "proven" here other than some folks are good at biting their lips...

bigrenna wrote: but it seems to me this is adding a "solution" where there is no problem.

Rob wrote:

bigrenna wrote: but it seems to me this is adding a "solution" where there is no problem.

The same could be said about 99.999% of the Bushwheels I've seen running around the lower 48 and to think some owners will even try multiple styles and sizes on the same pavement pounding plane

I say good on Bill for having the nuts to stand up to all the FAA bull to see his idea through STC, and then have the nuts to deal all the BS people who have never used his product will dump on him.